Factors associated with non-attendance, opportunistic attendance and reminded attendance to cervical screening in an organized screening program: A cross-sectional study of 12,058 Norwegian women

BMC Public Health

Volumn 11, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Hansen, Bo T ^a   Hukkelberg, Silje S ^a   Haldorsen, Tor ^a   Eriksen, Tormod ^a   Skare, Gry B ^a   Nygård, Mari ^a  

^a Cancer Registry of Norway ^*  (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RISK; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; ODDS RATIO; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; QUESTIONNAIRES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 79955083057     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712458     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-264     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Chapter 1: Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer - burden and assessment of causality. FX Bosch S de Sanjose, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003 31 3 13 12807939
2. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Strategies, Cervix Cancer Screening Lyon: IARC Press 2005
3. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: association with organised screening programmes. E Laara NE Day M Hakama, Lancet 1987 1 1247 1249 2884378 (Pubitemid 17070815)
4. Socio-demographic characteristics of participation in the opportunistic German cervical cancer screening programme: results from the EPIC-Heidelberg cohort. D Seidel N Becker S Rohrmann K Nimptsch J Linseisen, J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2009 135 533 541 10.1007/s00432-008-0485-0 18841394
5. Who has Pap tests? Variables associated with the use of Pap tests in absence of screening programmes. G Ronco N Segnan A Ponti, Int J Epidemiol 1991 20 349 353 10.1093/ije/20.2.349 1917233
6. Social epidemiology and the fundamental cause concept: on the structuring of effective cancer screens by socioeconomic status. BG Link ME Northridge JC Phelan ML Ganz, Milbank Q 1998 76 375 402 304-375 10.1111/1468-0009.00096 9738168 (Pubitemid 128459464)
7. Factors important in promoting cervical cancer screening among Canadian women: findings from the 1996-97 National Population Health Survey (NPHS). CJ Maxwell CM Bancej J Snider SA Vik, Can J Public Health 2001 92 127 133 11338151 (Pubitemid 32440325)
8. Barriers to screening for cancer of the cervix. RK Peters MB Bear D Thomas, Prev Med 1989 18 133 146 10.1016/0091-7435(89)90059-5 2710757 (Pubitemid 19128817)
9. Uptake for cervical screening by ethnicity and place-of-birth: a population-based cross-sectional study. R Webb J Richardson A Esmail A Pickles, J Public Health 2004 26 293 296 10.1093/pubmed/fdh128 (Pubitemid 39312935)
10. Reasons for non-attendance at cervical screening as reported by non-attendees in Sweden. MG Oscarsson EG Benzein BE Wijma, J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2008 29 23 31 10.1080/01674820701504619 18266164 (Pubitemid 351238412)
11. Reasons women do not attend screening for cervical cancer: A population-based study in Sweden. S Eaker HO Adami P Sparen, Prev Med 2001 32 482 491 10.1006/pmed.2001.0844 11394952 (Pubitemid 32568518)
12. The burden of genital warts: A study of nearly 70.000 women from the general female population in the 4 Nordic countries. SK Kjær TN Tran P Sparen L Tryggvadottir C Munk E Dasbach KL Liaw J Nygård M Nygård, J Infect Dis 2007 196 1447 1454 10.1086/522863 18008222 (Pubitemid 351411979)
13. Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study. J Dillner M Rebolj P Birembaut KU Petry A Szarewski C Munk S de Sanjose P Naucler B Lloveras S Kjaer J Cuzick M van Ballegooijen C Clavel T Iftner, BMJ 2008 337 1754 10.1136/bmj.a1754 18852164
14. Carcinoma of the cervix and tobacco smoking: Collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 13,541 women with carcinoma of the cervix and 23,017 women without carcinoma of the cervix from 23 epidemiological studies - International collaboration of epidemiological studies of cervical cancer. P Appleby V Beral AB Gonzalez D Colin S Franceschi A Goodill J Green J Peto M Plummer S Sweetland C La Vecchia FX Bosch R Hererro A Hildesheim D Skegg D Thomas T Rajkumar J Cuzick D Bull B Crossley J Green G Reeves S Kjaer R Painter M Vessey J Daling M Madeleine R Ray N Ylitalo X Castellsague, et al. Int J Cancer 2006 118 1481 1495 16206285
15. Assessing the effectiveness of a screening campaign: who is missed by 80% cervical screening coverage? S Orbell I Crombie A Robertson G Johnston M Kenicer, J R Soc Med 1995 88 389 394 7562807
16. Do condoms prevent genital HPV infection, external genital warts, or cervical neoplasia? LE Manhart LA Koutsky, Sex Transm Dis 2002 29 725 735 10.1097/00007435-200211000-00018 12438912 (Pubitemid 35266418)
17. Effect of an antepartum Pap smear on the coverage of a cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based prospective study. M Nygard AK Daltveit SO Thoresen JF Nygard, BMC Health Serv Res 2007 7 10 10.1186/1472-6963-7-10 17244348
18. Meta-analysis of social inequality and the risk of cervical cancer. S Parikh P Brennan P Boffetta, Int J Cancer 2003 105 687 691 10.1002/ijc.11141 12740919 (Pubitemid 36687738)
19. Differences in the risk of cervical cancer and human papillomavirus infection by education level. S Franceschi M Plummer G Clifford S de Sanjose X Bosch R Herrero N Munoz S Vaccarella, Br J Cancer 2009 101 865 870 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605224 19654578
20. Socioeconomic differences in incidence of cervical cancer in Finland by cell type. E Pukkala N Malila M Hakama, Acta Oncol 2010 49 180 184 10.3109/02841860903386390 20001504
21. Socioeconomic status and cancer screening. N Segnan, Social Inequalities and Cancer Lyon: IARC, Kogevinas M, Pearce N, Susser M, Boffetta P, 1997 369 376
22. The 'hows', 'whos', and 'whens' of screening: gynaecologists' perspectives on cervical cancer screening in urban Sweden. A Sarkadi C Widmark S Tornberg C Tishelman, Soc Sci Med 2004 58 1097 1108 10.1016/S0277-9536(03) 00280-6 14723905 (Pubitemid 38064229)
23. Inequalities in reported use of breast and cervical screening in Great Britain: analysis of cross sectional survey data. K Moser J Patnick V Beral, BMJ 2009 338 2025 10.1136/bmj.b2025 19531549
24. Factors related to participation in a cervical cancer screening programme in urban Sweden. Y Rodvall L Kemetli C Tishelman S Tornberg, Eur J Cancer Prev 2005 14 459 466 10.1097/01.cej.0000178078.21910.da 16175050 (Pubitemid 41433644)
25. A fall-off in cervical screening coverage of younger women in developed countries. L Lancucki M Fender A Koukari E Lynge V Mai E Mancini J Onysko G Ronco S Tornberg M Vessey J Patnick, J Med Screen 2010 17 91 96 10.1258/jms.2010.010017 20660438
26. Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: a population-based survey. J Waller M Bartoszek L Marlow J Wardle, J Med Screen 2009 16 199 204 10.1258/jms.2009.009073 20054095
27. The accuracy of self-reported Pap smear utilisation. JA Bowman R Sanson-Fisher S Redman, Soc Sci Med 1997 44 969 976 10.1016/S0277-9536(96)00222- 5 9089918 (Pubitemid 27129932)
28. Validity of self-reported Pap smear history in Norwegian women. O Klungsoyr M Nygard G Skare T Eriksen JF Nygard, J Med Screen 2009 16 91 97 10.1258/jms.2009.008087 19564522